Boomer07 Posted July 14, 2005 Report Share Posted July 14, 2005 [quote name='steggyD' date='Jul 13 2005, 11:01 PM']I'm not defending Bush, and I only brought up Clinton to help show that it's not just a Bush thing to defend landmines. I am defending the use of landmines in wartime situations. That's all. I'm sorry that some kid died by a landmine, [b]but those mines are a thing of the past. I assure you our weapons are getting better over time.[/b] Maybe we should go back to the days of lining people up in a field and just shooting at each other. Then maybe we can stop all this nonsense, right? I'm just looking out for fellow troops, I can't help myself. [right][post="114204"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] Mines now can determine how old someone is? Or what there intentions are? If so, then I'm all for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mongoloido Posted July 14, 2005 Report Share Posted July 14, 2005 [quote name='BlackJesus' date='Jul 14 2005, 12:03 AM'][b]about 15 lines down the page[/b] [url="http://www.sfjustlife.org/justicepeace/landmines.asp"]http://www.sfjustlife.org/justicepeace/landmines.asp[/url] [right][post="114206"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] I couldn't find a date for that tidbit, but I believe it to already be grossly inacurate. The miracles of science and genetics have already engineered a flower that blooms one color in normal soil and a drastically different color in the presence of explosive elements leaked from mines. Finding and removing mines is about to be as easy as seeding a region by air and demining the blue flowers. Read about it in Discover magazine. I'll look through my magazine collection for the article date. It's not new though. A year or two old by now at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest steggyD Posted July 14, 2005 Report Share Posted July 14, 2005 [url="http://www.state.gov/t/pm/rls/rm/29976.htm"]http://www.state.gov/t/pm/rls/rm/29976.htm[/url] [quote]Let me spell out the four key elements of the President's new policy: The first element is the President's firm, specific and unconditional commitment that after 2010 the United States will not use persistent landmines of any type, neither anti-personnel nor anti-vehicle landmines. The United States becomes the first major military power to make this comprehensive commitment regarding all persistent landmines. Any use of persistent anti-vehicle landmines outside Korea between now and the end of 2010 will require Presidential authorization. The use of persistent anti-personnel landmines during this period would only be authorized in fulfillment of our treaty obligations to the Republic of Korea. In either case, use of these mines would be in strict accordance with our obligations under international agreements on the use of these weapons. Within two years, the United States will begin the destruction of those persistent landmines that are not needed for the defense of Korea. The second element of the new policy is a firm commitment that within one year the United States will no longer have any non-detectable landmine of any type in its arsenal. The U.S. becomes the first major military power to make a commitment covering all landmines to the internationally recognized level of eight grams iron ore equivalent of metal content, assuring reliable detection by humanitarian deminers using the standard equipment in use today. Third, the President has directed a concerted effort to develop alternatives to its current persistent landmines, both anti-personnel and anti-vehicle, incorporating enhanced self-destructing, self-deactivating technologies and control mechanisms, such as "man-in-the-loop" and on-off commands that would allow our forces to recover the munitions. These enhancements are to be brought forward within the decade. The fourth major element of this policy is the President's decision to request from Congress a 50 percent increase in the budget for worldwide humanitarian mine action programs administered by the State Department, starting in fiscal year 2005, measured against the fiscal year 2003 budget level, to a total level of $70 million. Additionally, the Administration will soon solicit international support for a worldwide ban on the sale or export of all persistent mines, with exceptions only for training deminers or countermine personnel, improving countermine capabilities, and the like.[/quote] Now, open your eyes for a second BJ. I understand you have never served in the military. But, these mines are needed, according to our last two presidents. And, we don't have to sign a global treaty that completely bans things. We are making our own terms, and moving forward on making mines that won't harm innocent victims. Also: [url="http://www.heritage.org/Research/PoliticalPhilosophy/EM466.cfm"]http://www.heritage.org/Research/Political...sophy/EM466.cfm[/url] [quote]... A ban on the production and use of any type of land mine will disarm the few countries that are willing to abide by an agreement, but it will do nothing to force the cooperation of the countries and groups that use them indiscriminately. Moreover, such a ban will prohibit the legitimate use of self-destructing land mines, specifically those used by U.S. armed forces to protect American ground troops in combat. These American land mines are not part of the problem: They automatically deactivate, are not used in civilian areas, and do not linger for years in fields waiting for an unsuspecting civilian to tread on them... Today, the U.S. manufactures only mines that self-destruct, and the self-destruct rate of 32,000 smart mines tested since 1976 is 99.996 percent. Furthermore, there are no reported cases of unintended civilian injury or death by U.S. APLs in either 1995 or 1996. The mines used by the U.S. armed forces are rigidly controlled and responsibly used, and have had no identifiable impact on civilians. In other words, the use of mines by American forces is not part of the land mine problem that the President seeks to solve.[/quote] Take a peek on the other side for a second BJ, just a sec. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlackJesus Posted July 14, 2005 Report Share Posted July 14, 2005 [i][b]Wow you found info from the State department.... the very fuckers selling the mines that says they are safe, needed, and are not the problem... and Wow you found info from the Heritage Foundation which is the equivalent of Pat Robertson and the Gang to think that land mines can also be good ... I clicked on their link to help and got this [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//30.gif[/img] [/b][/i] [quote]Dear Friend, Is it time for you to join with Heritage in preserving America's values for the next generation? If you are fed up with high taxes, poor schools and a growing dependence on government, I invite you to become a member of the leading conservative organization in America today! Your tax deductible contribution today will ensure the continuation of Heritage's mission to build an America where freedom, opportunity, prosperity and civil society flourish. The Heritage Foundation offers a wide variety of Membership opportunities and benefits as well. We hope to hear from you soon! Sincerely, Edwin J. Feulner President[/quote] [i][b] sorry I will close my eyes again [/b][/i] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BadassBengal Posted July 14, 2005 Report Share Posted July 14, 2005 [quote name='Boomer07' date='Jul 13 2005, 10:53 PM']Countries. Get an atlas. [right][post="114191"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] What's this atlas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest steggyD Posted July 14, 2005 Report Share Posted July 14, 2005 Dude, the link to the State Department is just the same as clicking a link to the people writing a treaty to ban mines. Anyways, my entire point is that we are making smarter self-destructing mines that will harm many times fewer innocent people. At the same time, we are working towards cleaning up old mines, placed by many other countries than just those very horrible Americans, and we are still protecting troops. I know the last thing I want when I think I'm safe out there in a field as a troop, is an enemy unit sneaking up on our flank. That's my case, and I'm out... Back to Mariah's breastesesses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boomer07 Posted July 14, 2005 Report Share Posted July 14, 2005 [quote name='BadassBengal' date='Jul 13 2005, 11:24 PM']What's this atlas? [right][post="114222"][/post][/right][/quote] Sorry, I'm old. Google them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mongoloido Posted July 14, 2005 Report Share Posted July 14, 2005 [quote name='BlackJesus' date='Jul 14 2005, 12:21 AM'][i][b]Wow you found info from the State department.... the very fuckers selling the mines that says they are safe, needed, and are not the problem... and Wow you found info from the Heritage Foundation which is the equivalent of Pat Robertson and the Gang to think that land mines can also be good ... I clicked on their link to help and got this [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//30.gif[/img] [/b][/i] [i][b] sorry I will close my eyes again [/b][/i] [right][post="114220"][/post][/right][/quote] but banmines.org is an independent, unbiased news organization? [edit: oops. didn't get to steggy's post before typing this.] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beaker Posted July 14, 2005 Report Share Posted July 14, 2005 [quote name='BlackJesus' date='Jul 14 2005, 03:25 AM'][i][b]Most of the mines that the US produces are sold to 3rd world countries where warring factions litter the jungles with them and they blow up kids for the next 50 years [right][post="114163"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] So isnt it the warring factions fault for littering them all over their country to kill their citizens? Arent they the ones providing the demand that the mfgs will supply. Blame the gun mfg, land mine mfg, ladder mfg, fast food restaurant, etc...not the people making the choice to use the product (many times unwisely). No demand, no need to supply. The market dries up, and the mfg finds something else to make or goes belly up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mongoloido Posted July 14, 2005 Report Share Posted July 14, 2005 [quote name='Boomer07' date='Jul 14 2005, 12:28 AM']Sorry, I'm old. Google them. [right][post="114227"][/post][/right][/quote] Atlas: [img]http://www.paleothea.com/Pictures/Atlas.jpg[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted July 14, 2005 Report Share Posted July 14, 2005 Im not gonna jump on BJ, it seems everyone is doing that tonight, but dude .... [quote]Wow you found info from the State department.... the very fuckers selling the mines that says they are safe, needed, and are not the problem...[/quote] Not eveyone in any department is lockstep with any administration or policy, you know better than that, put down the big paintbrush and pick up the smaller one. [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/3.gif[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean Posted July 14, 2005 Report Share Posted July 14, 2005 We should sign the treaty. With the sophistication of air support and long range weapons, there is no longer a need for these things....unless your a third world military regime that wants to commit genocide anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whodey319 Posted July 14, 2005 Report Share Posted July 14, 2005 [quote name='BlackJesus' date='Jul 14 2005, 12:03 AM'][b]about 15 lines down the page[/b] [url="http://www.sfjustlife.org/justicepeace/landmines.asp"]http://www.sfjustlife.org/justicepeace/landmines.asp[/url] [right][post="114206"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] please dont tell me you linked to the archdiocese of san francisco for your source. You of all people against god and religion are now citing religous sources for your arguments, i cant believe they even have time to research landmines in between the molestation of young boys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jza10304 Posted July 14, 2005 Report Share Posted July 14, 2005 [quote name='mongoloido' date='Jul 13 2005, 11:58 PM']Atlas: [img]http://www.paleothea.com/Pictures/Atlas.jpg[/img] [right][post="114247"][/post][/right][/quote] [img]http://edina.ac.uk/images/atlas.jpg[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlackJesus Posted July 14, 2005 Report Share Posted July 14, 2005 [quote]i cant believe they even have time to research landmines in between the molestation of young boys.[/quote] [i][b]I was as shocked as you were... [/b][/i] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Dan_Bengals_FL- Posted July 14, 2005 Report Share Posted July 14, 2005 This treaty should definatley be signed. Mine use all together should be banned, and the US should set an example and be at the front of stopping mine use all together. Think would you want mines to be buried in your backyard or in a forest near your house, where your children may someday play? I didn't think so. We shouldn't be putting them in other people's backyard then either, so their children can get messed up and lose legs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bengalrick Posted July 14, 2005 Report Share Posted July 14, 2005 [quote name='Dan_Bengals_NJ' date='Jul 14 2005, 03:25 PM']This treaty should definatley be signed. Mine use all together should be banned, and the US should set an example and be at the front of stopping mine use all together. Think would you want mines to be buried in your backyard or in a forest near your house, where your children may someday play? I didn't think so. We shouldn't be putting them in other people's backyard then either, so their children can get messed up and lose legs. [right][post="114573"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] i can agree to this assessment... what reason did we give to not sign the treaty? i am getting that we have no alternatives for the mines... i don't know enough about this to answer logically, so i want to ask some military guys a question... what pros are there for the US to use mines anymore? is there any, besides selling them to make money? please bj, don't crush this post... i am searching for the right answers and don't need to be "educated" about how many children have died b/c of these mines... bung, steggy, loyalgafan, or any other guys in the military i'm missing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boomer07 Posted July 14, 2005 Report Share Posted July 14, 2005 [quote name='jza10304' date='Jul 14 2005, 10:23 AM'][img]http://edina.ac.uk/images/atlas.jpg[/img] [right][post="114371"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest steggyD Posted July 15, 2005 Report Share Posted July 15, 2005 [quote name='sean' date='Jul 14 2005, 03:09 AM']We should sign the treaty. With the sophistication of air support and long range weapons, there is no longer a need for these things....unless your a third world military regime that wants to commit genocide anyways. [right][post="114306"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] If by third world countries, you mean even Canada, just ten years ago, within their own territories, then yes. [url="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=canada+landmines+Gustafsen+Lake&btnG=Search"]Link[/url] As for why we need landmines, simple. Protection: [quote]The United States military uses anti-personnel landmines in a responsible manner in order to save American lives. [b]It employs mines designed to self-destruct after a short period (4 hours to 15 days)[/b], laying them down in marked areas to protect U.S. forces. Such use of anti-personnel mines is especially important when American personnel are outnumbered -- a fact of life in many combat situations, especially at the entry of forces into a theater of operations, and one that is likely to become still more common as the size of the Nation's military shrinks.(2) In fact, recent studies by the Army indicate that American casualties will increase by some thirty percent if U.S. land forces are obliged to fight without the use of landmines. As a result, the images of maimed children endlessly conjured up by proponents of the APL ban are not the only ones to be borne in mind; the practical effect of such a ban will probably be to create a great many more American flag-draped coffins and body-bags in future conflicts.[/quote] Bold to highlight our development of mines, where people won't be blown up years from now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bengalrick Posted July 15, 2005 Report Share Posted July 15, 2005 [i]In fact, recent studies by the Army indicate that American casualties will increase by some thirty percent if U.S. land forces are obliged to fight without the use of landmines.[/i] well that explains a whole hell of a lot... thanks man... it makes sense why we wouldn't sign it now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mongoloido Posted July 15, 2005 Report Share Posted July 15, 2005 [quote name='bengalrick' date='Jul 14 2005, 05:07 PM']i can agree to this assessment... what reason did we give to not sign the treaty? i am getting that we have no alternatives for the mines... i don't know enough about this to answer logically, so i want to ask some military guys a question... what pros are there for the US to use mines anymore? is there any, besides selling them to make money? please bj, don't crush this post... i am searching for the right answers and don't need to be "educated" about how many children have died b/c of these mines... bung, steggy, loyalgafan, or any other guys in the military i'm missing... [right][post="114599"][/post][/right][/quote] Not a military man, but a gamer with lots of real time strategy gaming. My guess is that mines are still the best way to protect your backside from ground forces as well as a tactical way to funnel movements of enemy ground forces where you want them to go. Mine a mountain valley, and you suddenly have walled off an entire region from effective armor or troop movement. In the games, I use minefields to protect my bases of operation. I also use them to wall off certain routes, thereby forcing the enemy to face me on my terms against my entire force. With the mines cutting off routes, I can dictate the battleground and also keep all the ground forces that would normally have to cover lots of enemy routes together. They become a serious powerhouse and don't have to worry about being flanked.... That's the simple effectiveness of mines in gaming. I wouldn't be surprised if they still hold similar benefits in the real world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Dan_Bengals_FL- Posted July 15, 2005 Report Share Posted July 15, 2005 Although I still don't support them and still think that the US should lead the front to ban the use of them, I must admit the fact that they now blow up in 4 hours to 15 days, makes them slightly better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlackJesus Posted July 15, 2005 Report Share Posted July 15, 2005 [quote]Not a military man, but a gamer with lots of real time strategy gaming[/quote] [i][b]you should apply for the Pentagon... Rumsfeld loves those "in theory" warriors[/b][/i] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beaker Posted July 15, 2005 Report Share Posted July 15, 2005 [quote name='BlackJesus' date='Jul 15 2005, 07:37 PM'][i][b]you should apply for the Pentagon... Rumsfeld loves those "in theory" warriors[/b][/i] [right][post="114973"][/post][/right][/quote] You should apply to CNN to be a Democratic political analyst. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bengalrick Posted July 15, 2005 Report Share Posted July 15, 2005 [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/24.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/24.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/24.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/24.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/24.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/20.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/20.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/24.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/24.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/24.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/24.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/24.gif[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.